7 ms·

As a passenger you are not required to produce identification unless the officer has probable cause that you have committed another crime (i.e. not wearing a se

As a passenger you are not required to produce identification unless the officer has probable cause that you have committed another crime (i.e. not wearing a seatbelt): http://www.patc.com/enewsletter/legal-answers/2-apr08.shtml http://www.patc.com/enewsletter/legal-answers/2-apr08.shtml It's always best to avoid any discussion with law enforcement, even if you have nothing to hide.

Pxtl 12y ago
Yeah, but turning down a police officer's request for information is a good way to encourage him to find something illegal about what you're doing. There's a law that isn't on any books but is the easiest way to get in trouble by breaking it: Contempt of Cop.
- patrickmay 12y ago
  Fear of this kind of abuse is why everyone should know and exercise their rights in all interactions with law enforcement. If 90+% of people weren't willing to be pushed around, the cops would be forced to learn their legal limitations.
  - pas 12y ago
    Okay, that's true, but how do people get out of the current dynamics where starting to exercise your rights to their fullest is instantly seen as suspicious and hostile behavior? Do you have a plan that works in marginal increments?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
techaeon 12y ago
This is incorrect. The article you cited refers to an 8th Circuit case which does not apply to Colorado (which is in the 10th Circuit) or any state outside that circuit. It is important to note what happened with the author of this article is known as a Terry Stop. Terry Stops are brought about by reasonable suspicion which is a much lesser standard than probable cause and they must end once the basis of the reasonable suspicion is denied. The Supreme Court in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004) upheld a Nevada statue which required anyone detained during a Terry Stop to comply with a demand for identification. Colorado has a statute similar to Nevada's which allows an officer to "request" identification rather than compel. However a failure to produce identification most likely would not deny the basis of the officer's reasonable suspicion may cause the individual detained to run afoul of other laws like obstruction. This is an unsettled area of law in many states so there is no hard and fast rule for what happens when a person refuses to identify themselves nationally. Nevertheless in this case the officer seems to have specifically detained the author under the reasonable suspicion that he solicited an illegal vehicle for hire. Once the passenger told him that he was in an Uber cab (a lawfully hired vehicle in Colorado) the basis for that suspicion was denied and the author should have no longer have been detained or asked for personal identification.

Pxtl 12y ago

Yeah, but turning down a police officer's request for information is a good way to encourage him to find something illegal about what you're doing. There's a law that isn't on any books but is the easiest way to get in trouble by breaking it: Contempt of Cop.

patrickmay 12y ago
Fear of this kind of abuse is why everyone should know and exercise their rights in all interactions with law enforcement. If 90+% of people weren't willing to be pushed around, the cops would be forced to learn their legal limitations.
- pas 12y ago
  Okay, that's true, but how do people get out of the current dynamics where starting to exercise your rights to their fullest is instantly seen as suspicious and hostile behavior? Do you have a plan that works in marginal increments?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

techaeon 12y ago

This is incorrect. The article you cited refers to an 8th Circuit case which does not apply to Colorado (which is in the 10th Circuit) or any state outside that circuit. It is important to note what happened with the author of this article is known as a Terry Stop. Terry Stops are brought about by reasonable suspicion which is a much lesser standard than probable cause and they must end once the basis of the reasonable suspicion is denied. The Supreme Court in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004) upheld a Nevada statue which required anyone detained during a Terry Stop to comply with a demand for identification. Colorado has a statute similar to Nevada's which allows an officer to "request" identification rather than compel. However a failure to produce identification most likely would not deny the basis of the officer's reasonable suspicion may cause the individual detained to run afoul of other laws like obstruction. This is an unsettled area of law in many states so there is no hard and fast rule for what happens when a person refuses to identify themselves nationally. Nevertheless in this case the officer seems to have specifically detained the author under the reasonable suspicion that he solicited an illegal vehicle for hire. Once the passenger told him that he was in an Uber cab (a lawfully hired vehicle in Colorado) the basis for that suspicion was denied and the author should have no longer have been detained or asked for personal identification.